User talk:Vanamonde93

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2406:3003:2077:1e60:c998:20c6:8ccf:5730 (talk) at 10:21, 17 August 2022 (→‎Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of anime distributed in the United States: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Anti-Hindu sentiment

I see that you are an admin. In the lead of the article mentioned above, it says, "anti-Hindu sentiment or Hinduphobia" but they are not the same. I asked someone to remove the term "Hinduphobia" on the talk page and was asked to establish a consensus for it. Can you do what it takes to establish a consensus for removing the term "Hinduphobia" from the article (or at least the lead)? 2405:204:5682:8044:0:0:11B7:30B0 (talk) 15:41, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduphobia can be replaced with Hindu detestation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.50.22.74 (talk) 05:09, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My admin role does not give me any authority over content; why don't you start the discussion yourself? There's nothing stopping you. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:00, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2022).

Administrator changes

readded Valereee
removed Anthony Appleyard (deceased) • Capitalistroadster • Samsara

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has been closed with consensus to add javascript that will show edit notices for editors editing via a mobile device. This only works for users using a mobile browser, so iOS app editors will still not be able to see edit notices.
  • An RfC has been closed with the consensus that train stations are not inherently notable.

Technical news

  • The Wikimania 2022 Hackathon will take place virtually from 11 August to 14 August.
  • Administrators will now see links on user pages for "Change block" and "Unblock user" instead of just "Block user" if the user is already blocked. (T308570)

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case request Geschichte has been automatically closed after a 3 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • You can vote for candidates in the 2022 Board of Trustees elections from 16 August to 30 August. Two community elected seats are up for election.
  • Wikimania 2022 is taking place virtually from 11 August to 14 August. The schedule for wikimania is listed here. There are also a number of in-person events associated with Wikimania around the world.
  • Tech tip: When revision-deleting on desktop, hold ⇧ Shift between clicking two checkboxes to select every box in that range.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Likud on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mile 16

At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mile 16 you are joining the discussion with your question. Can you remove the relisting and make you comment in the appropriate way or close the AfD in the appropriate way? Thanks Djflem (talk) 11:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Djflem: If I closed the AfD today, I would close it "no consensus", because while assertions have been made that Bolifamba is notable because it meets GEOLAND, no evidence has been provided in support. That is an assessment of the arguments presented at AfD, not my assessment of the evidence itself. Such a closure would waste the time of everyone who has participated at the AfD thus far, and so I'm giving all of you a chance to address the gap in the discussion instead. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:13, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are challenging the people who ivoted to keep the article based on the sources aready in the article, which seems to be joining the discussion rather than a neutral assesessment of it. It is not the job/is inappropriate of a closer to make a request to duplicate them in the AfD discussion, which it appears you are doing. Djflem (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is a closer's job to assess the arguments presented therein, which is what I did. Closers are not expected to evaluate the content in the article; that is the role of !voters. So a request to present evidence at the AfD is perfectly reasonable. I didn't evaluate the sources in the article, and I don't intend to: I have no opinion on whether they demonstrate notability, so I have not in any way joined the discussion. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:05, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The particpants of the discussion have expressed the fact that they are satifisfied with the evidence. Djflem (talk) 20:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, that doesn't matter; as an AfD closer, "X meets GEOLAND" carries as much weight as "clearly meets GNG"; that is, very little, without further elaboration. If a place meets GEOLAND, we would consider it notable, but just saying it meets GEOLAND doesn't make it so. Furthermore, there are currently only three participants, one of whom appears to disagree with your conclusions. Therefore, I repeat, were I to close the AfD today, I would have to close it "no consensus" (would you prefer that?) and I decline to participate, as I have not examined any evidence outside that AfD. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If it would help, I would be willing to expand my comment to make it clear that I am referring to evidence presented at AfD, rather than any evidence that may exist elsewhere. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:20, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It certainly does matter if the particpants, after having evaluated the sources in the article, determine that the subject satifies GNG or NGEO, which they have. If the nominator/another particpant would like to question that, that's fine, but that has not happened. That is NOT the role of the closer. You're asking to do makes you a particpant. So it's up to you to decide if you want to take part or close. You can't do both and add another layer to the AfD process, which is what you are doing. There is no closer request for evidence mechanism on Wikipedia. Or if there is can you provide a link to the place that explains it. Djflem (talk) 20:50, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's...just not right, for so many reasons. 1) It is entirely routine for relisters to request more discussion of specific items. 2) You didn't even say you had evaluated sources in the article, and you didn't list which ones establish that the topic meets GEOLAND; you just say that it does. All I'm asking you to do is explain why, because the alternative is a no-consensus closure. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)I haven't seen the exact words you used in your relisting but it is common for admins patrolling AFD and relisting discussions to recommend an evaluation of the new sources or recommending that those advocating "Keep" mention in the AFD the sources they allude are out there. Unless you are advocating Keeping, Deleting, Redirecting or Merging the article yourself, this seems like a pretty common comment if a comment is included in a relisting. Liz Read! Talk! 07:03, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Liz. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Good to see you back. We've had plenty of disagreements, but I know you have the best intention for Wikipedia, and I hope you feel similar about me, but YMMV of course! Cheers. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 20:22, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Thanks, very kind of you. Been traveling, been unwell...but unless something else crops up, I should be back for a bit. I've always liked your content work, glad to see you're active as ever. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:48, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise, I've almost always liked your administrative work...! Stay well. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of anime distributed in the United States

Hello,
You've closed the above AfD as "merge", which is slightly off the mark. What myself and others have pointed out in the discussion is that administrator assistance is needed to perform WP:HISTMERGE. Basically, we can think of the AfD consensus as a "rename-and-draftify" in support of nominator's intention to salvage usable prose from List of anime distributed in the United States and repurpose it into a different article. However, this is complicated by the fact that nom has already pre-emptively made a cut-and-paste copy of the article at Draft:History of anime in the United States and started editing it. "Merge" isn't correct here, since the content has already been moved, but without the legally required attribution. A history merge is now needed to rectify this, after which the original page can be blanked and redirected.
Thanks, 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 10:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Vanamonde93&oldid=1104880357"